Don't write clean code, write CRISP code
bitfieldconsulting.com
Don't write clean code, write CRISP code
1–10 of 170 posts
Re: Don't write clean code, write CRISP code
#2Uh, another acronym to be tortured by in interviews.
Re: Don't write clean code, write CRISP code
#3Uh, another acronym to be tortured by in interviews.
Yeah, I cringed and I think I chipped a tooth just by reading the headline. I'm so sick of these "let me sell you a book & some consultation" BS constructs.
Re: Don't write clean code, write CRISP code
#4Americans love their acronyms.
I don't foresee this one catching on
Re: Don't write clean code, write CRISP code
#5What CRISP is supposed to mean:
Correct
Readable
Idiomatic
Simple
Performant
Notice that all this is just well-wishing and suitably vague, so that you feel the need to buy a book & hire a consultant to explain it to you. The trick is there's nothing to explain.
Re: Don't write clean code, write CRISP code
#6So, which of these criteria were contrived, and which were left out, all to make this fit into “CRISP”?
Re: Don't write clean code, write CRISP code
#7So, which of these criteria were contrived, and which were left out, all to make this fit into “CRISP”?
SOLID
Re: Don't write clean code, write CRISP code
#8Well, since we're in a fancy acronym thread, here are some for your attention:
Beneath Utterly Ludicrous Labels, Salespeople Hawk Ineffective Tricks.
Bogus Utterances (with) Little Legitimacy, Sold (to) Helpless IT Teams.
Business Units Love Lingo, Selling Hyped IT Truisms.
Credit: ChatGPT.
Re: Don't write clean code, write CRISP code
#9Uh, another acronym to be tortured by in interviews.
Yeah, I cringed and I think I chipped a tooth just by reading the headline. I'm so sick of these "let me sell you a book & some consultation" BS constructs.
The first take-away of the article is:
> Anyone who has a foolproof software engineering methodology to sell you is a charlatan, especially if the methodology has a neat backronym.
Some of the others (there's more take-away than content, perhaps) are also note-worthy, except that I don't believe in correctness. Some functions may be well tested, but most be assumed partially faulty. It just isn't feasible to make them all correct. The article is jumping between these two stances, so this is not a great take-away.
Re: Don't write clean code, write CRISP code
#10It is laughable talk about "Don't Repeat Yourself principle" on a strongly biased towards Golang article. A language that took 13 years to add a simple method (Index) that helped the programmer to find an element in an array (slice). Before that you had to write a for loop every time you wanted something from an array. Talk about "DRY" ... That is everything but "simple" as described in the article.